June 7, 2011

"... to make him feel like our hero, he's very susceptible to the charm of some other woman making him feel what he needs. These days, women don't spend a lot of time thinking about how they can give their men what they need."

mebee it was his mommy that caused him to turn out to be such a louse? or could it have been his high school girlfriend? it must have been some woman somewhere because Lord knows democrats can't be held responsible for thier actions.

The discovery that good sex with your wife is affirming to a man's mental as well as physical needs a Christian concept. The extension of that benefit to be the cure for a mentally ill man is a bridge too far. It is also a way to blame women for the defects in a man...like the Muslim religion does to women. In divorce work I have often seen the mother of a mentally ill son (who probably crewed him up) seriously blame the young wife who got stuck with him for failing to do her duty to cure him.

I see. So, this is going to be the Democrat Party spin to try to save Flashy Tony?

Sick. Disgusting.

You people are really twisted abusing this poor defenseless woman this way. What the fuck is wrong with Democrats, anyway? Why can't you all just shut up and admit that what the guy was doing to the taxpayers, to the innocent victims of his crimes, and to the voters who sent him to Washington, D.C. was just plain wrong?

Why do you Democrats feel a compulsion to beat on this woman?

Why do you Democrats feel compelled to kick her in the face when she's down?

You're all a bunch of fucking wife abusers who should be ashamed of yourselves.

You can see in this discussion how feminism triumphed in the West. Althouse starts out the discussion with an assumption of moral virtue on the part of the woman. The men chime in to defend the honor of the damsel in distress.

Repeat several billion times since 1965 and you've got the entire delusional dialogue that brought feminism to triumph.

Women are very good at conspiring with one another. Men are damned fools.

This is weird because I think everyone's right - everyone but Chris Matthews anyway. (I especially love MadisonMan's "The guy is a jerk. You, women, cannot change that. YOU CANNOT CHANGE THAT." Yep - jerks are jerks. If you find one attractive, your problem.)

When my marriage came apart, there was a calm during the storm where I thanked my wife for two things - a card that read "You are my champion" and a pair of red socks. Once, I had fallen asleep as a kid, and when my foster mother woke me, I started a frantic search for "my red socks" - and years later, my wife finally "found" them for me as a birthday present. I thought that was brilliant.

She hit the roof. After 20 years of marriage, all I was grateful for was a fucking card and something I'd never wear that cost $3.00?!? I'm serious - by thanking her I just made the divorce worse. But, honestly, living with a NewAger is the ultimate "I Love Lucy" episode and finding out she'd decieved me about so much pretty much cancelled out everything but what was personal to me - me, as an individual.

Dr. Laura is right. That card mattered. My wife told me I mattered. Until I didn't. And then she didn't either. It was just me - and I had my red socks.

Or rather, generally speaking, it should be. Obviously, we all have greater or lesser libidos as a result of our innate physiologies and/or individual libido-affecting health or behavioral circumstances, but, on the whole, humans are perpetually in heat and driven to propagate the species.

Oh bullshit. I've seen this thought pop up in the comments here too. Maybe Weiner isn't getting enough at home. And the first thing guys do when they don't get enough nookie is send half-naked pictures of themselves to strange women on the Internet. Uh huh.

Women don't turn men into cads, but they may marry them.

A man with integrity respects that virtue for its own sake. You may get undermined and blindsided by life, but that doesn't negate your own self-respect.

"Feel like a man" is a virtue that comes with being a man. Weiner is no man. He is the logical outcome of a society that excuses behavior by magically turning the perp into a victim. Mathews, ever the fool, blames the woman when the man strays. Note the silence from the feminist's who turn on their "sisters" in a New York minute with no support beyond "boys will be boys" as the secular bus rolls over the jilted spouse.

Our culture is sick with the disease of secularism. Marriage is trumped by prenups, masculinity is measured by the thumb sucking excuses for men who never grew out of the binky stage craving attention and recognition from their latest Oedipus mother substitute.

Single mothers are at a disadvantage raising sons to be men and daughters who are considered competition in a society where growing old is a curse to be avoided a la "nip-and-tuck."

Time to grow up and start saying NO more often without fear of hurting feelings. It takes a man to be a husband and a father. They are in short supply these days.

Everything we know about Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin screams "marriage of convenience". Sex wasn't a part of the deal ever...at least not with each other.

That having been said, anyone who even considers blaming one person for another's behavior has her head up and locked. Unless Abedin held a gun to Weiner's head and ordered him to sext those women, she is blameless. But then, nobody's responsible for anything these days. We're all such sad victims. Barry told us so.

Because they like it. Let's not act like they're saints or the arbiters of all things. Look at Weiner - Huma married that - BUT DIDN'T WE KNOW HE WAS A JERK ALREADY? When told about his actions, according to him, she said what he'd done was stupid. That would lead me to think she, at least, has some indication of his depravity. And she liked it. She liked him. 'Nuff said.

A man with integrity respects that virtue for its own sake. You may get undermined and blindsided by life, but that doesn't negate your own self-respect.

Unless you start out cutting corners for yourself.

Amen. Resisting the urge to cut those corners is what being a man is all about. I may wail like I've got my foot in a bear trap, because life's dumped on me BIG TIME, but that's better than discovering I'm a weiner and O.K. with it.

"You can see in this discussion how feminism triumphed in the West. Althouse starts out the discussion with an assumption of moral virtue on the part of the woman. The men chime in to defend the honor of the damsel in distress."

Feminism? It's called presumption of innocence.

What is it that she is supposed to have done wrong?

All I've heard so far is:

(1) Congressman Weiner says that before they were married, she was aware that he sexted.

Criticizing someone on the basis of an argument that is waived at without ever being fleshed out is called innuendo. I'm never a big fan. I like my arguments fully stated -- much easier to see how sturdy they are that way.

Is the argument that we should condemn her because she wasn't sufficiently good in bed (or didn't appear frequently enough in his bed) to cure Congressman Weiner of his need for outside stimulation?

(That seems to be the Dr. Laura argument.)

Is the argument that we should condemn her because she knew he used to do this, but stood beside him earlier this week when he was accused of doing it still?

Is the argument that we should condemn her because she was willing to marry him at all, knowing that he used to exchange sexy pictures over the internet?

The most substantive thing you've written about why you want to condemn her are: "The wife looks like a rich spoiled brat." and "I guarantee you... the wife is also a jerk."

Um.

Yeah, I'd guess she probably is "also a jerk" -- most people who seek out politics are. I even suspect that of the politicians I like. People who seek out power over others aren't usually the most relaxing people to hang out with. But what in particular did you want to condemn her for?

(wv: bantarde -- one who behaves like a jerk, and then tries to pass his obnoxious behavior off as a joke. "That bantarde sent me a picture of his junk, and tried to pass it off as a prank when I called him on it." "What a bantarde!")

While I agree with part of what Dr Laura says I completely disagree that it is Huma's 'fault' that Weiner was being unfaithful on the internet and probably elsewhere.

Yes. A woman should support her spouse and try to fill his needs. So should the man do the same for his wife. It is a two way street. Both parties to the marriage should be commited to the other and be always thinking on how to make each other happy.

The fault, may be with one or the other. Maybe even Huma may be the non supportive spouse. But to BLAME her for Weiner's actions is ridiculous. She knew what he is when she married him.

However.......if there is no loving support and that isn't happening and the marriage is broken there is NO excuse for being unfaithful WHILE in the marriage.

If you can't fix the relationship and you are so unhappy.....get a divorce or formally separate before screwing around on your spouse.

Have some fucking integrity and respect for your soon to be ex-spouse.

What Dr. Laura is discussing is the care and feeding of the average guy (it is not just the husband's job to maintain a relationship). What motivates a man is similar but different than what motivates a woman. Yeah, a guy wants to be appreciated. A wife wants to be appreciated. If you have that feed back loop going, it is a good thing. If that loop is not functioning, then the marriage is like a fish tank without the filter pump going. Things will eventually get bad. And yeah, one partner or the other will eventually stray or want out.

What is going on with Anthony Weiner is not that. He is still that nebish 13 year old Bar Mitvah boy in the facebook picture and he is over compensating. He never grew up. Rather than focus on his marriage, he is looking for thrills on the internet. It is not even an affair or a clumsy Bill Clinton trist, it is more pathetic than that. And he pushed the recknless behavior until he got caught. Hell, he wanted to get caught.

Wikipedia says that she is. "Abedin is a practicing Muslim and Arabic speaker." It cites ABC and the NYT -- both articles in the last day, so take it with a grain of salt. Both articles may yet be edited after someone goes to check this "fact."

Weiner is a purile twerp. Ahnuld can't keep his pants on. Ditto Clinton. Some men screw up. When they do, we see it on the media over and over and over and over. Women write books about how lousy men are. The MSM goes into Full Estrogen Mode.

When women screw up (e.g., Ahnuld's pitbull terrier), there's a whisper, a wet sponge hits a window and then...silence forever.

I heard an expert, I think Dr. Ruth, say that seems like she gets two questions a lot: 1. My partner doesn't seem to want sex as often as I do. What is wrong with that person? or 2. My partner seems to want sex all the time, and never seems satisfied. What is wrong with that person?

The wounded bride should have known what sort of man she was dealing with. Wasn't Kate told by the staffers in the Royal Household that William was going to be wanting affairs, and she needed to be ready to stand by and do nothing?

So Jimmy Carter's joke on the economy goes like this: A man had been arrested for drunkenness, and the charges were amended for his setting fire to his bed in jail. When the drunk got before the judge he said "Your honor, I might have been drunk, but that bed was on fire when I got into it."

Whatever was wrong with Big Tony was wrong with Big Tony long before he met her.

Ah ha! I figured it out finally. And you people knew I would, didn't you? Huma is a Muslim and Tony the Weiner wanted to also become a Muslim. Therefore, he was only fulfilling a Muslim man's wishes to have 4 wives. Huma would understand. Besides, there isn't a damned thing she could do about it. All he was doing now, was shopping around. It really was that simple.

As for Dr. Laura, married couples are supposed to find ways to work out these things. Failure to work them out should result in divorce before infidelity. Or, failure to work them out is an excuse for infidelity only for the immature, irresponsible and arrogant.

When my marriage came apart, there was a calm during the storm where I thanked my wife for two things - a card that read "You are my champion" and a pair of red socks. Once, I had fallen asleep as a kid, and when my foster mother woke me, I started a frantic search for "my red socks" - and years later, my wife finally "found" them for me as a birthday present. I thought that was brilliant.

That is brilliant. It just goes to the heart of gift giving in that what hits you most are the things that are thoughtful, not expensive. (Getting mad about that is nuts, but I think I’ve heard similar stories before.)

As for the blame Huma thing, we have actual proof that Weiner is a scumbag, or at least a total and complete idiot. We don’t know jack about Huma except that her husband is an idiot.

Crack: I've heard Dr. Gregory House, who is also an expert on relationships, say "Bros before hos." which is sometimes twisted to "Hos before bros." In my divorce, all of the women friends stuck to my ex-wife. All of their husbands stuck to their wives. I left town.

From what the ex told me before I left, many of their marriages were equally, if not more screwed up. The men were denigrated and humbled, and refusing to take action.

Heck, one couple, the man needed to wear one of those sleep apnea masks. His wife would turn off the machine feeding him air when she wanted to wake him up in the morning.

If your wife treats you like shit and your marriage sucks, my guess is it probably is half your fault and half your wife's fault. Even if it is not, being a victim is pathetic. Get over it. Either make it work or get a divorce. But be a man about it.

And if your wive's friends and their cuckold husbands side with your wife, seriously is that a problem? You probably did not like them anyway.

I like the story of the wife turning off the sleep apnea machine. That made me laugh.

Oh and Dr. Laura is trying to sell books with that comment. While I do not disagree with her general position that wives should support their husbands if they want to be happy (just like husbands should do the same for their wives), I am pretty sure it is not applicable for a marriage falling apart in less than a year. Something else is going on there.

Huma is leaving is Weiner is in political Siberia. For better or worse did not include this.

The first two passes at reading that I saw "political Sharia" and couldn't, for the life of me, figure out what you were trying to say...lol. I do like the image that political Siberia brings to mind, though.

Fred4Pres:I did get the ex to finally go to counseling. The counselor recommended some books to the ex, and the ex got one, and we tried it out. It didn't work. I asked if the counselor had suggested any other books. The ex said yes, but if a person ordered $25 or more on Amazon they got free shipping and saved $4.95. She was waiting until she had more books to order to save the $4.95. Are you kidding me? She knew I was ready to leave but was willing to hang around to work things out, and she was saving $4.95 on shipping? If I didn't before, I knew then, she wasn't really interested in working things out. I think she wanted to be the victim by having me move out. Somethings just get smaller in the rear-view mirror the longer you drive away. Twain says the truth is so strange we don't need to create fiction.

As for Weiner, we can only guess, as can Weiner and his spouse, what has and is going through their hearts. My guess is that the lust of power is so great in him, and maybe in her, that sacrificing their marriage to get power will mean that in the end they will have neither.

I am pretty sure it is not applicable for a marriage falling apart in less than a year. Something else is going on there.

This. I might buy some sort of drifted apart/not supporting him story (that is if it were based on any evidence at all other than, as I mentioned earlier, her husband being an idiot) on year 10/15/20, but year one? Nope. Sorry. Not buying that.

"When a woman says, 'I can change him,' I give her my card. No, honey, you aren't changing anything. You can't change a tire. You sure as hell aren't changing a man.

Ha! Also ha to the “secret network that would humiliate Skull and Bones”. I’m not sure it’s all that bad, but still funny.

Lem: In Muslim countries, it is very difficult for the wife to initiate a divorce. There are very limited grounds for doing so. However, if Slick Willy Clinton officiated the divorce, it probably wasn't a proper Muslim marriage. Getting a divorce won't be so difficult. What sort of Muslim marries a non-practicing Jew? Not a serious Muslim. Unless she is doing that whole "lie to the infidels until we get what we want" sort of Muslim, but there is not evidence of that, is there?

The funnies thing about this whole affair is that Flashy Tony isn't going to get any more pussy.

Ever.

His wife isn't going to fuck him (or if you believe Chris Matthews wasn't fucking him in the first place.) And now everyone will be watching to see if he steps out so they call sell the video to RadarOnline or TMZ.

Message to Democrat Socialists: "You are not going to enjoy your time in public office. We are watching you and will hound you until your last day in office. Fuck up, and we'll do everything in our power to take everything you have away from you - your power, your possessions, your career, your wife and your pussy.

EVERYTHING.

That's your future up there ... the glaring lights of a press conference.

Seriously, the Democrats have to get this guy out of the House. He was doing all of this fooling around, and not even getting close to getting any pussy, or head out of all of his endeavors. At least Bill Clinton knew enough about fooling around to know that you have to be at least a cigar's length away before any of the hot action starts. Weiner is just a creep. Before the age of Twitter, men like him had to wear a trench coat and then stand in a park waiting for women to walk by.

I'm actually glad my wife deceived me, now, so no one can charge me with that. I was already about as "open-minded" as I could get, for love, and I'm happy to know what my limits are - and that I stuck to them - because I was NEVER going there.

I'm actually glad the weiner did that shit so I could think about all this.

What difference does it make, Peter, regardless of the fact that, heretofore, we've been talking about two-sex marriages. If you're not aware of the way gay sex works a la frequency, the discussion is lost on you to begin with.

Nice attempt at deflection though. Wait...no, it really wasn't. It was weaksauce. Wanna hit delete on that comment and try again?

I'm actually glad my wife deceived me, now, so no one can charge me with that.

How do we know she wasn’t deceived as well? I mean, she may have known that he was hitting on women online before they got married, but it’s not unreasonable for her to have expected that to stop when they got together. Men date before they get married too, are they allowed to still do it?

We know she had bad judgment in her choice of spouse. Beyond that, I think we’re still pretty in the dark. We certainly have no idea what their sex life is. It is interesting that some people’s first instinct is to blame her for her actions within the marriage absent any knowledge whatsoever, rather than simply acknowledging her for poor choice of husband.

but it’s not unreasonable for her to have expected that to stop when they got together.

Yes, it is. Completely. The only out there is that it was something he was doing before they got serious. If he's still doing it after they're engaged (or even before that if they're "serious"), the woman should have zero expectations that it's going to stop.

In a long-term marriage, I can kinda see Dr. Laura's point. People grow apart; they stop doing the little things (or even the big things) for each other. Which leads to "you've lost that loving feeling."

If Tony the Weenie Weiner had been married to Huma for the past 10 years or so, that might have been part of the problem.

But we know from the statements of the Weiss woman (the Nevada woman who has the 200+ sexts from Weiner) that their relationship began in August of last year -- a mere MONTH after Weiner's marriage to Huma.

There wasn't time for Huma to lose interest and neglect her man in this case, because Tony's always been a dog, and always will be.

Now, it's possible Huma -- as Weiner stated in his press conference yesterday -- was informed of his online fun before the marriage, and she chose to marry him anyway. One might ask, if she knew what he was before the wedding, why would she go through with it? And why would he continue with this destructive behavior well before the honeymoon was over?

Let's just say if you look at the wedding portrait, those two kids don't look like they're hopelessly in love; he, in particular, looks terribly uncomfortable. So it's probably a safe assumption to make that the marriage was probably always a sham -- something they entered into for purely political reasons. Maybe he figured to hold a higher political office than congressman, he needed a wife by his side. Maybe she figured to end all the rumors about her and her boss Hillary, she needed a husband who was a known whoredog.

Obviously, that's pure conjecture on my part.

I'm not going to hold her responsible for his misbehavior, in part, because we're all solely responsible for our actions. Others can play a supporting role -- and I'm sure people can argue what supporting role Huma held, if much of any -- but the bottom line is that Tony took his own dick out of his shorts and took pics of it. Huma didn't help him with that. Did she aid and abet him with his online dalliances? Did she allow him to carry on with them, as long as he was discreet? We can't know that, and may never have a complete answer to that.

Should she have been a little suspicious of him, once the dickpic in question surfaced? If she, indeed, knew about his online affairs before the wedding, then she probably should've been able to make the leap that he was lying about the hacking.

Chrissy is, and always was, the worst of the partisan hacks, going back to when he worked for slugs like Tony Coelho.

What he's showing is that the Cause is more important than anyone and Huma is going to get the Sarah Palin treatment (she's not a real woman, only feminist dishrags are women) from him. Since Huma didn't show up, she's betrayed the Cause (at least in his eyes) in the sense that she's going to save herself and doesn't care that much if his House seat flips (everybody else is saying, "Smart broad").

Weiner married her to get in good with the Clinton crowd, sex he got elsewhere, affection he got from the mirror.

What Dr Laura said has only to do with normal, honorable men, not power-crazed megalomaniacs.

The only out there is that it was something he was doing before they got serious. If he's still doing it after they're engaged (or even before that if they're "serious"), the woman should have zero expectations that it's going to stop.

Well, yes if he said he was doing it while they were engaged I totally agree. Do we know that? I assume he told her he "used to" flirt on the internet before they were together. In that case, I think it is completely reasonable to expect it to stop.

I think Fred4Pres is very close here. I'm sure Weiner went through his formative years not being anyone's idea of a dream date, but now he finds himself in middle age as the object of female desire -- or at least the object if interest by females he has not met in person. He married a professional woman who has an intense job requiring lots of travel; she is not there very much, but the interested women are out there 24/7. Weiner is weak; he gave in to the temptation; he lied about it. It's not that complicated, and it has very little to do with the wife.

In that case, I think it is completely reasonable to expect it to stop.

In that case, why would the woman even know about it? Unless, of course, she was one of the lucky recipients of the behavior in the first place. If that were the case, though, Oscar Wilde comes to mind, ie, "A man who marries his mistress leaves a vacancy in that position".

Scott M, my bad: Huma is leaving if Weiner is in Political Siberia. That is my prediction. Political Sharia? That is an intriguing idea.

Lem:

Lem said...If Huma is a Muslim, divorce is out of the question.

At least I think that's right.

6/7/11 9:50 AM

Divorce is super easy in Islam: The husband only has to say "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you." Hence the reason the man has to give his bride a wedding dowery as part of the marriage contract--that money is what she gets if she is divorced. Islam made divorce easy. And women can even demand divorce under Sharia. It is an option under some marriage contracts.

That is one thing that I never got about some fundamentalist Christians, they claim the bible is infalible and critize Catholics for not following it, then allow divorce because some fat king in England wanted it.

And this scandal is bad because Anthony betrayed the promise of higher office. Spitzer and Sanford married their wives before they got famous, Abedin married a prince of the Democratic Party.

I can't help getting that feeling looking at pictures of her.

I sometimes question myself when I stereotype people, but then step back and consider that it is something that we all do (unless maybe we are autistic or have AS) and mostly our filters are decently ok.

So, I look at her and see an ice princess. In the wedding picture, Weiner was a prop for her. She seems much more alive and focused when with Hillary!

As someone pointed out today, Weiner has/had a pretty commanding presence, knew he had it, and used it. She is enough better looking than he that he either got her because of that, or because he was that Democratic prince, or, more likely I think, because of both. Part of the reason that he was prince there was because of his presence and ability to push people around and to out talk anyone in the room.

If Weiner had kept his shirt and pants on, and the camera turned off, while not with her, it might have been a perfect marriage.

I voted that she would stick with her man, because I didn't see her being all that affected by this. But, I have now changed my mind, based on that idea. I agree that she married him most likely because he was a prince and she was a princess looking for a good consort. After this, is is much less likely that he will ascend to the heights that both of them dreamed he would, and for that, I think that she will do what so many women think is necessary in such a situation - cut her losses and start looking for her next prince. Probably not immediately, but within the next year.

""When the wife does not focus in on the needs and the feelings sexually, personally, to make him feel like a man, to make him feel like a success...""

The problem is, in our society right now, why should a woman do that? If she doesn't make her man feel like a hero, and anything goes wrong, she can file for divorce, be in the right, at least with all their friends, and get the kids and money. So, why bother with "be[ing] the woman" as a GF of mine is want to say.

I don't know how it would come up unless she was like "why are you following these women on twitter" or something. Of course, our only knowledge of her side and what he told her comes from Weiner, who is an admitted liar. My initial thought was that he told her he talked/flirted with some girls online before they got married and that was it. That part is not terribly uncommon and I don't put it much different than actual dating, which of course you do and are allowed to do before you get married but are supposed to stop when you are in a serious relationship.

If he was talking to these women when they were together and she knew about it then she wasn't deceived and could have reasonably expected that to continue through marriage. But we don't know that. And he was single before so if he wanted to skeeve on girls on the internet he wasn't hurting anybody else, so I don't see how the mistress thing comes into play.

As someone pointed out today, Weiner has/had a pretty commanding presence, knew he had it, and used it.

Commanding?

Anthony is agressive and overbearing but hardly commanding. He operates primarily by monopolization and intimidation. People who are commanding have a capacity to lead. When did Anthony ever show leadership?

I can assure you that there are many Democrats who are delighted at the payback Anthony is getting, the nasty little Putz.

After perusing the thread and checking the original Dr. Laura link I would add a few observations:

1. Tony gets turned on by some stuff he wasn't getting at home (she knew about it).2. Abedin married him to satisfy some need of her own; whether that included sexual surrender/satiation is anyone's guess (I've met few women who are actually turned on by honorable, well-meaning, truthful shlubs (I think one of the surprises for feminists is how their biology refuses to reconcile with their ideology)).3. I suspect the long term survival of Tony's marriage has a lot more to do with his public status than it does his wiener status. If he really wanted what he wanted, he needed to pursue it with some more intelligence than he did (which may have meant not getting married).

No amount of sex with one's wife will satisfy the desire for other women—unless she is a swinger and introduces you to other women and has sex with them too. However it might prevent a man from acting on that desire. I am not unfaithful to my wife, but what I think about when I look at other women is none of her business. If a guy is unhappy with his sex life, he can get a divorce. It's not hard.

President Coolidge and his really hot wife once visited a farm. She noticed the rooster servicing all the hens. She asked, 'How many times a day does he do that?' The response was '10 or 12 times a day.' She instructed them to 'Tell the President that.' They did.

President Coolidge observed the rooster for a while, and asked, 'How many hens does that rooster service in a day?' The said '10 or 12 a day.' He said "Tell Mrs. Coolidge that." Hence, the Coolidge effect: the ability of males to be aroused by new females. A man might be able to have sex with a number of different women in one day, but probably wouldn't be able to have sex with the same woman that many times in one day.

Just as rape is frequently a crime of violence and power, and not sex, so too with Representative Weiner. His behavior isn't so much about having sex as it is about engaging in self-destructive behavior, and that can not be laid at his wife's feet so early in the marriage. He had the baggage before he married her.

Everything we know about Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin screams "marriage of convenience". Sex wasn't a part of the deal ever...at least not with each other.

Weiner is amazed that this thing has blown up in his face. The marriage was to provide a "beard" for Hillary and Huma. There have been rumors for years about them. Maybe Hillary is thinking of a primary challenge to Obama and wanted the rumors squelched. Who knows?

Weiner's part of the deal was that he could continue to have his wiener serviced without complaint. Now, the furor must be really inexplicable to him. Who cares about what Democrats do with their wieners ? He just didn't understand the new social media.

Shouting Thomas, I can see why you are a sad and lonely man. You are totally clueless about women and, it seems your own sex.

It is totally possible to be in the dark about your husband's predilections. She loved him and chose to see the best in him. I believe that she is out the door, I would be. She is a smart, well educated woman who has little or no concern for "keeping up a front" or she would have been at the press conference, vociferously defending her husband.

Mark my words, he will resign before the week is out. His career is over, he has lost the respect of all of us, me included.

Actually the Laura and Matthews statements are pretty much opposite. Dr. Laura suggests that wives who lose their husbands' attention are oblivious women who gave up attention to their husbands first. They don't have any interest in attracting and pleasing their men because, well, maybe because they are feminists, or maybe because they are just selfish. But she was not talking about these women being enablers of bad behavior who know what is going on and fit their lives around it. That is Oprah's gig. Everybody is a participant in every behavior around them. Matthews was being Oprah, not Laura.

every valentine's day, the gals in the office will go on and on about what gifts they got. "that's great," i tell them...and what," i ask, "did you get him?" you've never seen a more blank stare of incomprehension than i get to that question...so 'dr'L has a point.as for the sex stuff, what titus said.